TV Notes;Oscar Numbers Slip

By Bill Carter

Published: March 27, 1996

As usual, the Oscar telecast on ABC on Monday night was the second-most-watched event on television this year, trailing only the Super Bowl; but it also trailed last year's Oscar show by a significant margin.

The 3-hour-36-minute broadcast, with Whoopi Goldberg as host, averaged a 30.3 Nieslen rating, with a 50 share. Nobody at ABC was complaining about numbers like that. (Each rating point represents 959,000 homes; share is the percentage of homes watching the show among those using television.) But last year, the numbers were 7 percent better, a 32.5 and 53 share.

Was this year's show that much less interesting than usual? Perhaps not. The rating was roughly comparable to what the Oscar special scored in 1993 (31.2 rating, 51 share).

It was the 1995 show that broke the pattern, adding about 7 million viewers, according to ABC's estimates. Three possible reasons were offered by network executives yesterday for the surge in 1995 and the fallback in 1996:

*David Letterman. Though Mr. Letterman has disparaged his performance as last year's Oscar host, network executives gave him most of the credit for the one-year ratings boost, especially among younger viewers, who deserted this year in the largest numbers.

*The most popular movie of 1995, "Forrest Gump," dominated the awards last year. This year most of the nominated films had either already moved to videocassette or were only marginally supported at the box office.

*The Oscars were preceded this year by a numbing array of other awards shows. The Golden Globes, the Screen Actors Guild Awards, the Blockbuster Video Awards and the People's Choice Awards all featured almost the identical cast of big-name stars as the Oscars.

Nothing matches the Oscars for prestige, of course, and ABC executives argued that since the show's ratings have remained consistent throughout the 90's, the extra award shows were no factor. BILL CARTER

Photo: Whoopi Goldberg performing a monologue on the Oscars show.(Reuters)